Jump to content

Iranian President's statement on Israel


Recommended Posts

Slightly off topic, but what do people make of the Iranian President's comment that "Israel should be wiped of the face of the Earth"?

Tony Blair's responded today by more or less warning Iran that it would end up in a war if it carried on making statements like this, probably because Bush was busy today with domestic issues for a more high profile US statement.

Has Battlefront picked the wrong middle-east target country for CM:SF?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we went to war every time an Iranian politician said "Death to Israel", we'ed all have been conscripted twenty years back.

The ex-mayor of Tehran is a radical who's constituency is the poor. This goes down great with them, who are the ones it was aimed at, but that doesn't make it a change in Iranian policy or likely that they'll act.

Hard as it might be to ignore the jerk standing on his own roof, shouting his head off while waving a chainsaw, about the worst thing you can do is climb up their and try and take it off him....

Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dirtweasle,

You'd kill a guy for waving a chainsaw on his own roof, isn't that a bit over the top, not to mention illegal.

Wouldn't you be worried about his friends and relatives coming for you in the night, or would you just plant claymores with trip wires all around your house and hope no friends came to visit....

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

Meh. Iran and Israel do not border each other, so any war between them is very unlikely to involve conventional forces. Not much of a game there, I think.

true. both have ballistic missiles, and Israel got *da bomb*, wait a while and iran has it, too. maybe they can borrow one or two from the pakistanis, too.

however,

you are leaving CMSF out of the equation.

in the world after CMSF:

israel is in on the deal to attack syria. let's say israel gets syria.

the US forces for CMSF will be drained from iraq. iraq is, for a small moment, left to itself and all civil war breaks loose until the iranians step in and take over.

iran gets iraq.

voila they share a common border and can now comfortably kill each other both conventional and non-conventional.

all this under miss president h. clinton.

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saying Israel should be "wiped of the map" is not a threat of war but a statement of opinion (reckless and inflamatory it may be)- like Pat Robertson saying Chavez should be assassinated. Notice many Jews share Ahmadinejad's opinion at least according to these guys: http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/

In any case Iran had a democratically elected government overthrown by the CIA in the 1950s and suffered a brutal 10 year war after Saddam invaded in the 1980s - backed by the CIA - so the idea of desiring nukes when their neighbor Israel has them and almost 200,000 US/UK troops surround them on 2 borders is not entirely without understanding. Though we are getting political now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard the comments and read the context in which they were made. Seems to be typical crap aimed at the local yokels. Very, very dumb for a head of state to say something like that. Having said that, I am going on the assumption that it was carefully calculated to have some sort of effect that benefited the president in some way. Sometimes what works at home has the opposite effect elsewhere.

I doubt Iran will become a battleground any time soon. Though something will happen there. Too many things swirling around, especially the domestic issues with the largely materialistic youth.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat Robertson is not a head of state.
That's true and I'm not trying to minimize the Iranian statement, but Robertson's is reflected by many in the current Administration which alledgedly backed the failed coup against Chavez a couple years ago. A lot of oil and politics here - that's one reason why I prefer WWII ETO gaming - it's easy to view it as simple good vs. evil and we know the good guys won.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's easy to view it as simple good vs. evil and we know the good guys won.
Obviously you don't play CMBB since that game is Evil vs. Evil (except for when playing the Fins, because they were über nice guys smile.gif ) And of course there are the problems with the Western and Souther Fronts as well... such as firebombing civilian targets, leveling towns/historical structures on a hunch the bad guys were in there, the occasional large scale slaughter of POWs, looting on a massive scale, rearming the Mafia, giving away 1/2 of Europe to be plundered by the Soviets, etc. And let's not forget FDR deliberately trying to get into a shooting war with Germany even though Congress clearly didn't want one. Then of course there is all that wonderful stuff that happened in the PTO, which I don't think I need bother to detail. Yup, the morality of WWII is as clear as mud ;)

One thing I've learned over the years, when it comes to geopolitics NOTHING is clear cut and NOTHING is as it seems. Sometimes theory and reality are more closely related than other times, but nothing is clear cut good or bad.

Steve

[ October 27, 2005, 10:26 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

Dirtweasle,

You'd kill a guy for waving a chainsaw on his own roof, isn't that a bit over the top, not to mention illegal...

Are you familiar with the old saying about how if you have to explain a joke it's not funny?

Seriously? Well Peter, I'd probably just sit back, drink another beer, and wait for him to lose his balance and just fall off on his own. Of course I might also throw an apple at him too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it makes you feel better, the current ultra-hard-line Iranian president was swept into office in the last election. Bush's dream of middle-east democracy come true. Still, even for Iran 'Israel wiped off the map' was a bit much - I'd say their most bellicose rhetoric in maybe 10 years. Doesn't bode well for politics in southern Iraq either, considering the Shiite links down there.

my 2¢

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you mean in Iran the intolerant religious right achieved the presidency through dirty political tricks and manipulating the ignorant rural population? Gasp! Now I completely understand and agree!

My original 'ironic' point was there's a law of unintended consequences at work here. Fostering democracy in a volatile part of the world is a wonderful idea - like unthawing frozen pipes in your basement on a cold winter day is a good idea. In both cases, though, you wouldn't want the whole structure to inadvertantly burn down around your ears as a result of your actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DirtweaslOkay, as ever it's difficult to tell whats serious and whats a joke, especially with a one line post.

I think we more or less agree that the guy is talking like an idiot, but the west using force to stop him talking like an idiot would do more harm than good,

Of course that didn't stop Tony rushing to the first available microphone and threatening to move towards exactly that.

Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />it's easy to view it as simple good vs. evil and we know the good guys won.

Obviously you don't play CMBB since that game is Evil vs. Evil (except for when playing the Fins, because they were über nice guys smile.gif ) And of course there are the problems with the Western and Souther Fronts as well... such as firebombing civilian targets, leveling towns/historical structures on a hunch the bad guys were in there, the occasional large scale slaughter of POWs, looting on a massive scale, rearming the Mafia, giving away 1/2 of Europe to be plundered by the Soviets, etc. And let's not forget FDR deliberately trying to get into a shooting war with Germany even though Congress clearly didn't want one. Then of course there is all that wonderful stuff that happened in the PTO, which I don't think I need bother to detail. Yup, the morality of WWII is as clear as mud ;)

One thing I've learned over the years, when it comes to geopolitics NOTHING is clear cut and NOTHING is as it seems. Sometimes theory and reality are more closely related than other times, but nothing is clear cut good or bad.

Steve </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve: Is this comment you made, cited above, a statement of fact? Or opinion? Just like your last lengthy comment? What are your taking dude? Back to developing and building interesting and challenging computer war games. Leave the "facts" to the left wing and right wing loonies. Isn't that what you wanted? Tag

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tagwyn, dunno what you're going on about man. Nothing factually incorrect in my statement. So yes, statement of fact.

Back to developing and building interesting and challenging computer war games.
Back before I developed games I secured a degree in history, with special emphasis on WWII. Can't help it if my knowledge of history spills into my knowledge of historical games :D

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...